You you have listened to our members

Sorry Freddy but I didn't read that into Corners post at all. He was making an articulate observation, if you have read many of Corners past posts you will know that if he intended to write what you you implied he wrote, then he would have done so.  

It is long time since I did my economics studying, but I remember a concept whereby there was sometimes a positive correlation between price and demand. That is to say, as price rises so does demand. This may happen with exclusive, up-market products such as Prada handbags, for example. They acquire a snob value. 

I hesitate to suggest this can be applied to CMC sites, but I suppose the so-called "honeypot" sites (I actually hate that expression) might show that effect and this is, perhaps, what Corners was thinking about. 

But Freddy had a point too. Corners' comment clearly implied the positive correlation to which I refer and Freddy was thus entitled to question it by wondering if the implication was that you could charge any price you liked and people would still come. The "if" was not about the future. It was an hypothesis.

How pitches are being priced……..(quote from an article on demand based pricing)

“There are three different approaches to demand-based pricing:

Price skimming: Operators charge the highest price of a product that customers are willing to buy and then gradually scale the price down. 

Penetration pricing: Operators undercut the value of a new tour and set low prices to attract new customers. That way, the operator generates buzz around the new tour right away. Banks often do this to attract new customers. You’ve probably seen them offer a “free checking” account or a similar offer for a limited amount of time. The idea is to attract the customer with a discounted service or product and provide so much value that they stick around long-term.

Value-based pricing: Operators price a tour based on how much customers think it’s worth. For example, Starbucks knows it has a loyal customer base. For its loyal customers, the perceived value of a Starbucks drink is far greater than the actual price of the coffee. They love the experience of walking into a cafe, ordering their favorite drink, and lingering around long after they’re done. As a result, Starbucks is able to charge a premium for its drinks.”

Corners' comment clearly implied the positive correlation

As the writer No I did not and it wasn't what I was thinking about. Expensive sites appear to thrive while cheaper sites appear to be closing, a simple observation and which I even posted somewhere that there has more going on than price in all this.

I made a simple observation based on my experiences on the sites I visited this year so to do any correlation on just my observations (and then apply that to all club sites) would be foolish and I certainly wouldn't do that.

Also again if you want to discuss correlation theory Freddy quoted £100, now that is far in excess of even the most expensive sites (three or four?) on the network and an even greater excess when considering the average price on standard sites of about £40 to £45 meaning £100 is over two times bigger. As I'm sure you remember correlation fails miserably if you try and go too far outside the data set, as you know there's even a name for it - extrapolation.

And my observations were based not on honeypot sites but 'standard' club sites, names available on request. I don't think it's to do with price alone but paying for certain facilities and quality than club users appear to want. 

Well some thought the future, others thought an idea (I personally wouldn't call it a hypothesis) but I hope it's clear what I was referring to.   

Done

peedee